Saw my reading list and was reminded about the picture thing but I ain't doing it because I changed how my pictures are stored and there aren't very many of them here at the office to browse through a-seeking things interesting.
So instead, noodlery on, what? Wimmins? Writing? Wreading?
In spare moments I use my phone these days to read off of this list: California As I Saw It. Sort of my personal time machine. The first entry describes some horrific scenes in old Chinatown, or that are horrific if you can inform the sensational yet reserved Nineteenth Century prose with an imagination as base as mine. I'm currently just starting the second. I read a few others at random, and then decided to cover them all by going down the list. The second is by John Bidwell, famous pioneer, whose name my mother confidently claims is pronounced "Bid-wull". She knows because her grandfather worked for Mrs. Bidwell, who was quite a bit younger than her husband, and that's how she pronounced it.
Indeed, my great-grandfather was a handyman and lived at the Bidwell Mansion a little while. My cousin has an ornate bookshelf alleged to have been plucked by him out of the mansion trash heap.
'Kay, that was Wreading. About Writing? Sure, I do that. NaNo is on the way. As usual I've no idea what I will write about and no plan to find out. A foray into history? A love story based loosely on my "real" life? Some hack of a mystery? I can't know because I don't read much fiction these days and no longer have a good idea what resonates with me. Just have to wing it.
As far as Wimmins, yeah, well. There's material: Relationships present and past, dating practices, whatever all I dunno. Too early to ruminate on the web version and the real-life versions are too volatile and/or personal for a good exposition in this space.
Well, one thing. I have a profile and in two of the three pictures there is a woman on my arm (different woman, and no one you-all know. Common sense says fer godz sake don't do that on a dating site but I'm really not looking for common quantity and numerical odds. I want responses from wimmins who don't bat an eye, wimmins to whom it never occurs to want me to stop dating her and her before dating them. Why would they anyway? I honestly don't get that. Wouldn't they rather go out with someone who's NOT online only because he has no one else? For me, the gals who are looking for their "best friend" get an immediate pass. Unrealistic expectations ain't sexy.
Ooh, soapbox. Touchy much? Might be a blog post in that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Wreading: haven't done much. :-( If I'm not working and stressing over same, I'm lumpen-ing because of stress from work, or I'm out being a partying foo', or I'm hangin' with E, or somesuch.
Writing: just the bloggery. No-Na-No for moi.
Wimmens: I am not in the market for any, thanks. And I already have some best friends, so I'm good there, too.
Burn: going out with some Burner friends (some of whom are wimmens) to see Schpongle tomorrow. Or however you spell that.
I keep writing responses to this and they just sould whiny and defensive, but I'm pretty sure your post wasn't meant to be critical of me. :)
So instead I'll simply say good luck and I hope you find lots of happies!
No, I don't key off your observations but my experience (limited, to be sure) with a few people face to face. I feel as though I am judged and set aside for basically saying what most men would if they were more self-aware or honest.
I feel judged, too, which is part of the reason I'm leaving the dating site world. I'm judged as "not fun" -- I guess because I want a serious relationship, kind of what I had before, sans little babies, but with both parties older and wiser and self-knowing, etc. But guys my age who've done that already don't want it again, OR they do and grab on like I'm a life raft, which is major ick. I don't want to be texted all day at work by some semi-retired dude telling me what he's buying at Costco. There's staying in good, regular communication and there's being a wacko -- I can't seem to find a balanced guy on a dating site. Either they want multiple women or they become a piece of clingwrap after one date. Where's someone NORMAL with a job and hobbies who is on board with the idea of a monogamous rel? Not on the dating sites!
I don't see what is unsexy about the idea of liking someone and deciding to focus dating energy on that one person because you see potential LTRness there, but NOT getting all clingwrappy about it. You both still have your own separate stuff (just not dates with others) and maybe you start to combine a bit of it when there is mutual interest in doing so. This doesn't seem weird. Zillions of peeps did this in the "old days."
Men without a lot of time/money to pursue multi-relationships will say they want this too; I simply can't meet the right ones on dating sites, plus the process is too cold and unromantic. I feel I'll have better luck just being more social generally.
Don, I can see the appeal for you with the pics though. The small % of women you want to respond will see you with the other women and think, hey this is a fun guy other women like, and I want to see what he's all about. And on POF you're always gonna get nasty messages. Hell, I got one dude telling me to get new glasses and another one acting suspicious that I really baked anything. People are just so damn BIZARRE. Never in a zillion years would I think to send a msg to someone I didn't like only to criticize. Whyyyyyyyyyyyyyy?????
Sorry for comment essay! :)
I lo-o-ove comment essays! And your preference makes perfect sense. I'm just approaching this from an unusual direction. A gekko can say polyamory and get loads of choices. A Don has to look for a unicorn without saying so. Maybe I should just say so. Advertise for unicorns and if people don't know wtf I'm talking about, good for them. Cuz, you know, my cup runneth over. My reasons for being online are pretty obscure, even to me. Serves me right if it don't work.
But srsly, you expect ANYone to beLIEVE you actually BAKE in THOSE glasses, omG.
Yeah, as I think about it, I just get annoyed with the whole thing. What I just wrote isn't really true, but it's simple. I feel if I'm not accurate, then I'm playing some game. I hate games. But I also must avoid long complicated expositions. All an essay does is give people things to reject. So it's like you have to game it no matter what. Bah and double bah.
Man, you sure do talk a lot.
Looking for a best friend is no better or worse a goal than your goals, Mr. Judgy McJudgerson, and you're in no position to decide how realistic it is either - you don't know what they'll get any more than you know what you will, that's why they call it a crapshoot. Not that it matters how you judge their goals, or whether you judge them at all, because the bottom line is, their goals won't work for you and vice-versa. Which means you're handling it exactly the way I think you should by passing them over immediately, not that my approval is the least bit relevant here, so... this whole comment had no point, except to illustrate how judgy I am myself.
Except! That obviously Paula has no need for some dateyguy to tell her what he's buying at Costco, her need for endless prattle about the trivial is already fulfilled by me.
What Paula describes is mostly what I want, and have. The only difference is that my serious relationship men either already had another partner, or intend(ed) to keep looking for a variety of reasons. But one of them fits the cling-wrapped description. The others, not so much. All seem perfectly normal to me. They're guys. They're wonderful amazing friends
In re the pics with different wimmens, there is a (barely hidden) rule of the job market today that one must have a job in order to be considered to get a job.
Perhaps that should be true in the meat market as well.
When I can, I will remove or edit the pictures because I did not ask for permission to use them. Occurred to me today.
I reworded so my intent is a little more clear.
Nary a nibble, even when I initiate contact. I expect nary too. Face to face is so much better. It requires one have a face, though, and I've hidden mine for half a century. But recently I was offered the concept of shyness as an expression of ego, and am thinking to let shyness go away with ego, if I can.
I would probably be put off by an "accompanied" profile picture on a dating site (a concept which I discovered creeped me out as soon as I experimented with it even briefly). Because I am an extreme introvert. I really don't want a relationship with someone who has a bunch of other relationships because that tells me that he is eager for more human interaction than I can tolerate in my immediate vicinity.
I've always found my serious relationships among people who weren't looking for a "relationship", of any kind, anyway.
That almost-elided moment when you look over your shoulder and say "Oh. How about that -- you." Dating sites make that impossible.
"I've always found my serious relationships among people who weren't looking for a 'relationship'... Dating sites make that impossible."
They make the cute meet impossible, sure.
Every serious relationship I have today is someone I met online. My most recent is via a dating site.
Okay, I did meet the guy originally more than 30 years ago. We had some classes together in college, and I remembered him by name because he had smacked me on the ass and I despised and loathed him for a long time after. But I didn't know it was he going in, when he first attracted me with his clear writing and obvious intent to pay attention to what I had to say.
But what you said about "weren't looking for a 'relationship'" aligns with who I am. With each of the men I love, I had not at all been looking for a relationship. Even the dating site guy.
Post a Comment